Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective

To assess the quality of the information a patient (parent) may encounter using a Google search for typical otolaryngology ailments.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting

Tertiary care center.

Methods

A Google keyword search was performed for 10 common otolaryngology problems including ear infection, hearing loss, tonsillitis, and so on. The top 10 search results for each were critically examined using the 16-item (1-5 scale) standardized DISCERN instrument. The DISCERN instrument was developed to assess the quality and comprehensiveness of patient treatment choice literature.

Results

A total of 100 Web sites were assessed. Of these, 19 (19%) were primarily advertisements for products and were excluded from DISCERN scoring. Searches for more typically chronic otolaryngic problems (eg, tinnitus, sleep apnea, etc) resulted in more biased, advertisement-type results than those for typically acute problems (eg, ear infection, sinus infection, P = .03). The search for “sleep apnea treatment” produced the highest scoring results (mean overall DISCERN score = 3.49, range = 1.81-4.56), and the search for “hoarseness treatment” produced the lowest scores (mean = 2.49, range = 1.56-3.56). Results from major comprehensive Web sites (WebMD, EMedicinehealth.com, Wikipedia, etc.) scored higher than other Web sites (mean DISCERN score = 3.46 vs 2.48, P < .001).

Conclusion

There is marked variability in the quality of Web site information for the treatment of common otolaryngologic problems. Searches on more chronic problems resulted in a higher proportion of biased advertisement Web sites. Larger, comprehensive Web sites generally provided better information but were less than perfect in presenting complete information on treatment options.

Keywords

Internet quality Google

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Fox

. Health topics. Pew Internet and American Life Project February 1, 2011. http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/HealthTopics.aspx. Accessed January 4, 2012.

Ybarra

Suman

. Help seeking behavior and the Internet: a national survey. Int J Med Inform. 2006;75:29-41.

Eysenbach

Powell

Kuss

. Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web: a systematic review. JAMA. 2002;287:2691-2700.

Barker

Charlton

Holstege

. Accuracy of internet recommendations for prehospital care of venomous snake bites. Wilderness Environ Med. 2010;21:298-302.

Charnock

Shepperd

Needham

. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53:105-111.

Rees

Ford

Sheard

. Evaluating the reliability of DISCERN: a tool for assessing the quality of written patient information on treatment choices. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;47:273-275.

Ademiluyi

Rees

Sheard

. Evaluating the reliability and validity of three tools to assess the quality of health information on the Internet. Patient Educ Couns. 2003;50:151-155.

Experian Hitwise. Search engines. http://www.hitwise.com/us/datacenter/main/dashboard-23984.html . Accessed January 2, 2012.

Diaz

Griffith

. Patients’ use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:180-185.

10.

Fox

Online health search 2006. Pew Internet and American Life Project October 29, 2006. http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2006/PIP_Online_Health_2006.pdf.pdf. Accessed January 6, 2012.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB